[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[pct-l] Hike the Hill
I'll look forward to more information on this topic of budget cuts.
I'd like to see some actual figures. What were the NFS and NPS
budgets in FY2005 and by how much will they be reduced in FY2006?
You know, in actual dollars and cents. And maybe a little background
on how the funds get allocated among the various competing programs.
The reason I ask is that the website of the National Parks
Conservation Association (http://www.npca.org/across_the_nation/
visitor_experience/endangeredrangers/introduction.asp), an
organization that complains that the NPS is chronically underfunded,
nonetheless points out that the NPS budget has increased almost 3%
over and above the rate of inflation each year since 1998 and the
description of the President's FY 2006 budget called for "a $144
million increase to continue upgrading National Park Service
facilities." And further, "Operational funding for parks, refuges,
and public lands will be 20 percent higher than in 2001." (http://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/interior.html) Has Congress
passed a smaller NPS budget than the one the President proposed? The
Interior Department website says the FY2006 budget will "Fulfill the
President's commitment to provide $4.9 billion over 5 years to
address a maintenance backlog in National Parks." http://www.doi.gov/
news/05_News_Releases/050207a.
Regarding the National Forest Service, I'm not sure the federal
budget has anything to do with NFS spending on trails. I may be
completely wrong about this. If I am, I hope someone will educate
me. I was under the impression that NFS funds trail construction
from the Roads and Trails Fund. This fund was established in 1913.
Ten percent of all NFS revenues go into this fund and the NFS uses
this money, not funds from the federal budget, to build and maintain
roads and trails. If I am correct about this, NFS decides how to
spend this fund without any congressional oversight, so lobbying
congresspersons and senators won't do you a bit of good. There are
only two ways to increase NFS spending on trails. One is for the
forest service to sell more timber and I can't imagine that approach
will gain much traction with this group. The other is to spend more
of the fund on trails and less on roads. Nobody likes to build roads
as much as NFS and I suspect that trying to affect the way the NFS
spends this fund would be far more effective than lobbying Senator
Windbag, who will not have the slightest notion how trails are
funded, will enthusiastically agree with everything you say and then
do nothing about it. Like I say, I could be wrong.
The FY2006 federal budget is under great pressure to fund the war on
terrorism, increased homeland security measures and hurricane relief
to name just a few high priority items. Trails are important to us,
but a lot of people need convincing. If we complain about budget
"cuts" when the budgets haven't actually been cut, we are likely to
loose our audience entirely. To paraphrase Sen. Moynihan, we are
entitled to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own
facts. What are the actual facts?
It is not the topics of the posts on this list that I sometimes find
depressing and discouraging. It is the tone. I argue for a living
and I really don't like having to hear a bunch of arguing in my
leisure time, but that's a personal issue. People have opinions and
they are going to express them whether I want to hear them or not,
but it would sure be nice if the opinions expressed were a little
more thoughtful and fact-based.
Wayne Kraft
On Dec 23, 2005, at 6:08 PM, Lonetrail@aol.com wrote:
>
> Hello Out there
> I think some of you are missing something. Do you know that
> concessionaires
> in our Parks did not get a budget cut from our government this
> year? They got
> an increase. Guess what we got? We got a cut. Why! It?s called
> lobbing.
> Now you don?t want to hear that it would interfere with your
> posting. The NP
> and NF also received cuts. Yes that right. You know our tails go
> thru these
> parks. I received this email today perhaps some of you may have
> received the
> Hike to the Hill also. I try to attend as many of these meeting as
> I can I may
> spent between $2,000.00 and $3,000.00 a year attending these
> meeting. Now if
> it bugs the shit out of some of you who don?t want to hear the
> politicks of who
> get the money. You can bug right out. The rest keep reading the
> following. I
> must warm you I will post some of what I bring back. Please try to
> attend.
> For more info email me of post.
> HIKE TO THE HILL.
> Learn how to lobby for your favorite trails and "Hike the Hill"
> during
> American Hiking Society's Advocacy Week held every winter ? a
> pivotal time in the
> federal budget cycle. Congress needs to hear from you about the
> issues that
> affect your trails and trails nationwide. Advocacy Week 2006 will
> take place
> February 13 - 16 in Washington, DC. Advocacy Week includes
> sessions on policy
> issues, training in lobbying and advocacy skills, and an event on
> Capitol
> Hill. The presentations/training will take place on Monday Feb 13,
> with most of
> the week devoted to your meetings with your Senators,
> Representatives and
> key congressional and federal agency staff.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pct-l mailing list
> pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
> unsubscribe or change options:
> http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l